The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Friday, seeking greater transparency regarding the federal government’s decision to review the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone. The organization alleges that political interference may have influenced the FDA’s actions.
The complaint names the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), accusing the agencies of withholding information about the FDA’s announcement to reevaluate mifepristone. CRR claims that both agencies failed to respond to prior requests made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which requires federal bodies to provide requested records to the public.
The lawsuit specifically seeks details about the FDA’s review process for mifepristone, including the data used to justify reevaluating a drug that has been safely prescribed for over 25 years. CRR is also requesting information regarding any potential influence from HHS or outside parties on the agency’s decision, highlighting concerns that political considerations may be shaping the process.
In June, FDA Commissioner Martin Makary announced that the agency would review mifepristone. The announcement followed a controversial report published in April, which CRR and other experts have criticized as “junk science.” That report claimed that nearly 11% of women experienced serious complications such as sepsis, infection, or hemorrhaging within 45 days of using mifepristone, a finding widely disputed by medical professionals.
According to CRR, the close timing between the report’s publication and the FDA’s decision to review the drug “suggests political interference.” HHS and FDA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
“The public deserves to know if the FDA is making decisions about medication abortion based on debunked information or in response to political pressure,” said Rachana Desai Martin, CRR’s chief U.S. program officer.
“The Trump administration is targeting a drug that has been FDA-approved for 25 years and safely used by millions.”
The lawsuit marks the latest effort by reproductive rights groups to challenge government actions that could restrict access to medication abortion and underscores ongoing concerns about political influence over FDA decision-making.
Ethics and Public Policy Center Report Sparks Controversy in FDA Review of Mifepristone
The Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC), a conservative think tank and advisory board member of Project 2025, recently published a report that has played a central role in the federal review of the abortion pill mifepristone. Project 2025 is a right-wing policy agenda that advocates for the president’s FDA appointees to ban the medication.
Critics have described the EPPC report as junk science. The paper was not peer-reviewed and did not disclose its underlying data, making it impossible for other researchers to verify its findings. Data scientists told HuffPost that the report’s conclusions do not align with the data it claims to analyze.
A spokesperson for EPPC explained in April that the report was not submitted for peer review due to what the organization described as “the extensive pro-abortion bias in the peer-review process,” which they claim prevents publication of analyses that critically examine mifepristone.
The timing of the report’s release raised eyebrows. It was published just days after FDA Commissioner Martin Makary stated he had no plans to restrict mifepristone unless new evidence showed the drug was unsafe. Soon after, anti-abortion advocates and lawmakers began using the report to argue that the pill should face restrictions.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a prominent anti-abortion figure, sent a letter to Makary urging him to “follow this new data and take all appropriate action to restore critical safeguards on the use of mifepristone.” Following Hawley’s letter, which presented the EPPC report as factual, Makary announced the FDA would review the medication.
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also told Hawley during a May Senate hearing that the EPPC report was “alarming” and supported a review of mifepristone.
“The timing of the administration’s interest in mifepristone and its reliance on discredited right-wing policy papers instead of long-standing peer-reviewed studies suggest that anti-abortion ideology is dictating the drug regulation process,” said Rachana Desai Martin, chief U.S. program officer at the Center for Reproductive Rights.
During a Senate hearing last week, Kennedy told lawmakers that he is working with Makary to review mifepristone and appeared to reference the EPPC report, citing the same 11% statistic used in the paper.
“We’re getting data in all the time, new data that we’re reviewing. And we know that during the Biden administration, they actually twisted the data to bury one of the safety signals, a very high safety signal – around 11%,” Kennedy told Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
“So we’re gonna make sure that doesn’t happen anymore.”
The report, its timing, and the subsequent FDA review have fueled concerns among reproductive rights advocates that political motivations, rather than scientific evidence, are influencing federal oversight of a medication safely used by millions for more than 25 years.
